Was that something you discussed at the vision mixers guild annual dinner last evening SDItoo :shrug:

The last I noticed, I was allowed to give myself time off from work to come out and play ;)

Brian :D

Its hard to know precisely what the tester means unless you have a look. Corroded but not seriously weakened could mean it's covered in rust or the corrosion could be the size of a postage stamp. Both would fit the description.

There are 4 paragraphs which have absolutely nothing to do with MarinaBrian’s own vehicles:

Para. 2: attempt to discredit me.
Para. 3: as above.
Para. 5: provocation.
Para. 8: attempt to discredit me.

Also Graham, in respect of paragraph 5, it surely cannot have escaped your notice that such remarks are directed at me and me alone. Other members, particularly MGJohn, frequently post even more critical comments of the motor trade which do not attract MarinaBrian's attention. That is because he is deliberately targeting me; in other words a personal vendetta. The reason for that is that he did not get his own way in the debate over timing belts.

Simon

It was something which you posted publicly on this forum a short time ago, and which I read.

Now, would you mind confining your posts to the thread topic please.

Simon

Graham - it feels to me that your assessment of Brian's post is not quite on the mark. As a minimum, it is possibly doing Brian a disservice by diluting his intent.

If one reads certain parts of Brian's post which follow

Brian clearly responded to Simon's post and addressed it to Simon. Brian could have quoted the OP and then given his view on the technical matter in hand. Instead, I read Brian's post as a response aimed directly at Simon.

The reason I highlight this is that we see similar posts from a few members which comment on another poster rather than confine it to the subject matter.

I don't have an axe to grind in the irritations between Brian and Simon - I have my own feuds to manage :D. But, I do think that it is not worthy of a moderator to dismiss Simon's point out of hand by stating that Brian's post is something that it is not and vice versa. Of course you may take a view on the degree of transgression by either party, but that is a different matter.

Personally, I find it strange that anyone would expect a list significantly different to the one in the OP for a 15-year old car unless work has already been done in each of the advisory areas.

To keep mss happy, I'll first address the OP - I find that at most MOTs tend to completely ignore the colour of the indicators and repeaters - I see so many cars where the bulbs have obviously lost their coating that the indicators are flashing white. It's refreshing and proportionate to make these advisory if there's any doubt as to their colour.



As already mentioned the rust issues are going to be quite subjective and will require personal inspection and assessment. All else seems rather simple- exchange steering racks can be had for around £100 (at least mine was couple of years ago) if needed - or maybe it's just the inner track rods for which I think there is an alternate part available.


If you're able to do the work yourself then it may well be worth it. If not then you'll have to take labour into account. Just remember that once done you'll have a car that you know it's condition underneath. Spend the same money on a replacement and you could find yourself back in the same situation next MOT...



Now I'll address the other matter.


Well MSS - that is the nature of debate to refute an argument

(argument: a reason or set of reasons given in support of an idea, action or theory.) To who else should someone wishing to refute address themselves?






[QUOTE=mss;2669857]Brian could have quoted the OP and then given his view on the technical matter in hand. Instead, I read Brian's post as a response aimed directly at Simon.
[/QUOTE}


He could have, but isn't bound by forum rules to do so. If that is the system you prefer then try stackexchange mechanics.



This however is first and foremost a discussion forum. If someone makes a counter argument to yours then debate the point - not the man.

And that exactly was the point of my post. Debate the point, not the perceived characteristics of the man i.e Simon. As a reminder, I was referring to the following:


Just because it is not against the forum rules does not make it good etiquette or practice.

Knowing the history I find all the points made by Brian valid. All of those are positions previously stated or taken by Simon - On the other hand the response by Simon - "attempt to discredit me (x3), provocation (x1)" signifies some reading what you want to read between the lines. I think that's all that needs saying - let's get back to the OP eh? :getmecoat::wantpics:


Pictures of the rust are what's really needed for anyone else to help decide on the rust issues.

No point reading between the lines. Look closely between them - there's nothing there!:D

I don't recall ever mentioning figures Simon, apart from in PM to one person ;)

Anyway back to the day job :drool4:

Brian :D